NP - On James Wood

[Markekohut]

Okay....I'll stir the stone soup with contrarian pepper.

FIRST. I resist and would reject the division into " literary" and genre (or commercial) fiction.
that division was (mostly) created by publishers and should not be applicable to real works most of the time. (Of course, once created, publishers get writers to create within the labels)

was Dickens literature when published? was Wilkie Collins? Poe's stories?

SECOND: in a spin on Bunny Wilson--nicely semi- refuted by Jochen--I ask are all themes possible (in genre fiction)?   ( you can refute me with a spin on a recent remark of Jerome Charyn's " All fiction is crime fiction"    But I'm an innocent bourgeois reader who needs convinced. 

1.5 million copies of Gone Girl have been sold, I read. everyone loves it. I got hold of a
Yet-unread copy due to Paul and other plisters.........

Yet, I resist cause however well done it is, what I hear is it is another kind of marriage novel
And craziness novel that seems less....ambitious....less the tackling of BIg Truths than other plist favorites from DeLillo thru DFW thru David Mitchell, Luminarium, etc.

refute me.




Sent from my iPad

On Oct 11, 2012, at 12:09 PM, Paul Mackin <mackin.paul at verizon.net> wrote:

> On 10/11/2012 10:03 AM, David Morris wrote:
>> http://www.salon.com/2012/10/11/national_book_awards_genre_fiction_dissed_again/
>> 
>> What you won’t find [in the National Book Award list] is the book that
>> many, many literary fiction buffs read and loved in the past six
>> months: Gillian Flynn’s best-selling crime novel, “Gone Girl.” Flynn’s
>> book is inventive, shrewd, mercilessly observant and stylishly written
>> — qualities that are very welcome and likely to be celebrated in a
>> literary novel. Her theme, the dissolution of a marriage in
>> recession-era America, is substantive. Her technique (which, at the
>> risk of spoilage, I’ll vaguely refer to as unreliable narration) is
>> sophisticated. But let’s face it: “Gone Girl” is still considered a
>> crime novel, and the likelihood of any work of genre fiction being
>> seriously considered for a major literary prize still seems as
>> far-fetched in 2012 as the election of a black president looked to be
>> in the 20th century.
>> 
>> The National Book Awards is no more to blame in this respect than any
>> other prize: The Pulitzer, the Booker and the National Book Critics
>> Circle prizes have all refrained from honoring any title published
>> within the major genres. (True, some observers considered “Snowdrops”
>> by A.D. Miller — shortlisted for the Booker last year — a crime novel,
>> but the entire 2011 Booker selection process was enveloped in
>> controversy arising from the judges’ much-denounced remarks on behalf
>> of “readability.”) The genres have their own prizes, but the most
>> prestigious of the awards remain the private reserve of literary
>> fiction.
> I certainly can see along with Matthew that Wood's book should be entitled 'How Literary Fiction Works.'  The divide between literary and genre is about as binary as anything you are likely to find these days. There IS a big sociological (guess that's the right word) crossover, but that's a different question. And correct,  Gone Girl should have been recognized by everyone from the start as literary not genre.
> 
> 
> About the symbolic violence question,  is the example really very violent?  Wood is certainly opinionated about what a 'true character' should be--in the case of a villain he should be frightening.  And some readers will take this as gospel.  But what are ya gonna do?
> 
> P
> 
> 
>